1/23/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M The Comprehensive Plan designates S.R. A -1-A and C.R. 510 as arterials, where access should be limited to collector roads and major traffic generators. Keeping with this policy, the Department of Public Works recommended that access to the development should be limited to Shell Lane, a private road abutting the subject property to the north. The applicant, however, did not feel this was a feasible recommendation and chose not to modify the site plan in conformance with the Public Works Division's recommendation. (See attachment #5). When Summerplace Subdivision was originally platted in 1981, only Lot M, lying on the corner of C.R. 510 and S.R. A -1-A was designated within the Restricted Commercial District. Subsequently, Lot L, lying immediately north of Lot M and on the corner of Shell Lane and A -1-A was rezoned to C-lA, thus creating a .69 acre commercial site. As a residentially zoned parcel, Lot L would have been accessed via Shell Lane; however, it is the applicant's position that as a commercial piece of land the subject property should be accessed from. S.R. A -1-A. Taking into consideration the primarily residential nature of the private road, the Planning staff concurs with the applicant, that access to the business center should be provided from S.R. A -1-A. Although the -site plan depicts _a means for positive interior traffic flow, the position of the ingress/egress point is unacceptable, and alternative points of access are restricted. Given the limited amount of frontage on S.R. A -1-A (219' ) and its location between a major traffic intersection and a private residential road, it is critical that consideration be given to the intensity of the.proposed development. The proposed use of a bank will contribute substantially to the volume of traffic directed through the intersection. A bank, the size of the proposed facility, will attract approximately 594 trips per day, while comparable office space will only attract 38 trips per day. Based on this, a determination has been made that given the size and location of the subject property, the proposed use of a banking facility is not appropriate. Since banks are designated as special exception uses within the C-lA Restricted Commercial District, the approving body has the authority to determine if this use is appropriate for this site, considering the intensity of the use, the area, location and its relationship to the neighborhood. It is the position of the Planning and Development Division and the Public Works Division that the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion approved the site plan request despite potential traffic hazards which may be created by the proposed project. The staff's appeal of this decision is based upon the detrimental impact which the proposed development may have upon the pub- lic's health, safety and general welfare. RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the Board grant the appeal of the Planning and Development Division and the Public Works Division and reverse the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission in approving the subject site plan. 25 JAN 2 3 1985 BOOK F4,cF6��